Recovery Of Excess Payment Made By Mistake Is Permissible When Employee Furnished An Undertaking To Refund: Supreme Court Anticipatory Bail Application Under Sec 482 BNSS Is Maintainable Even If No Formal Order Of Arrest Is Passed By CGST Authorities: Allahabad High Court Consensual Physical Relationship Following Three-Year Courtship Does Not Amount To Rape If Marriage Promise Fails: Supreme Court Criminalization Of Civil Disputes | Courts Must Not Engage In Speculative Reasoning While Dealing With Quashing Petitions Under Section 482 CrPC: Supreme Court Mere Recovery Of Tainted Money In The Absence Of Proof Of Demand Is Insufficient To Sustain Conviction Under Section 7 And 13 PC Act: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Quash NDPS Proceedings Merely Relying On Jurisprudence Regarding Evidentiary Value Of Confessional Statements: Supreme Court Extra-Judicial Confession Made While In Police Custody Is Inadmissible In Evidence: Supreme Court Taxing Authorities Must Levy Tax Based On The Form Of Goods At The Time Of Sale, Not On Potential End Use: Supreme Court Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders CBI Probe Into State Corruption Scams After Punjab Police Fails To Act On ED’s Section 66(2) PMLA Referral Section 482 CrPC | FIR Based On Consensual Relationship Gone Sour Cannot Be Sustained To Coerce Marriage: Supreme Court CISF Personnel Soliciting Bribes For Employment Is Guilty Of 'Gross Misconduct' Under Section 18 CISF Act: Andhra Pradesh High Court PIL | State Cannot Use Demolition Powers To Silence Whistleblowers Or Deflect Accountability: Punjab & Haryana High Court Criminal Proceedings Against In-Laws Without Specific Allegations Of Overt Acts Constitute Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Order 22 Rule 9 CPC | Admission In An Abated Suit Does Not Constitute Estoppel Against Landlord In A Fresh Eviction Proceeding: Calcutta High Court Arbitral Award Cannot Be Set Aside For Non-Adjudication Of Claims Specifically Abandoned By Parties: Delhi High Court Mere Long Possession Is Not Adverse Possession; Defendant Must Prove Hostile Animus To Deny Title Of True Owner: Himachal Pradesh High Court Reopening Of Assessment Under Sec 148A(d) Income Tax Act Cannot Be Based On 'Change Of Opinion' Without Fresh Tangible Material: Gujarat High Court Municipal Authorities Must Initiate Formal Proceedings And Grant Opportunity Of Hearing Before Sealing Premises:  Jharkhand High Court Court Cannot Compel Third-Party To Undergo DNA Test Unless Necessary For Just Adjudication: Madhya Pradesh High Court Trial Court Cannot Defer Bail Application Merely Because A Transfer Petition Is Pending In High Court: Punjab & Haryana High Court Section 108 BNS | Mere Taunts Or Harassment Regarding Not Bearing A Male Child Do Not Constitute Abetment To Suicide: Rajasthan High Court

Allahabad High Court Upholds Eviction of Akbar Nagar Slum Dwellers, Ensures Right to Clean Drinking Water Takes Precedence Over Unauthorised Occupation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Allahabad High Court, in a landmark decision, has upheld the eviction of slum dwellers from Akbar Nagar, balancing the rights of slum dwellers against the larger public interest of ensuring clean drinking water to the citizens of Lucknow. The bench of Justices Vivek Chaudhary and Om Prakash Shukla observed, “the right to clean drinking water for the majority cannot be compromised by the unauthorized occupation of government land.” [Para 14]

The case arose from a conflict of fundamental rights: the right of slum dwellers to adequate housing versus the right to clean drinking water under Article 21 of the Constitution. Petitioners, residents of Akbar Nagar slums, challenged the eviction orders issued by the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) and sought rehabilitation under relevant state laws and policies. [Para 1, 4]

The slum dwellers of Akbar Nagar had occupied the banks of the Kukrail water channel, a critical source of drinking water for Lucknow. The LDA had issued eviction orders under the U.P. Urban Planning and Development Act, 1973, which were contested by the slum dwellers on various legal grounds. [Para 4, 6]

The court recognized both rights as integral to the right to life under Article 21. However, it emphasized the need to prioritize the right to clean drinking water for a larger population over the unauthorized occupation by the slum dwellers. Referring to several Supreme Court judgments, the bench underscored the importance of both rights but favored the public interest in clean water. [Para 13-18]

Decision: The court directed the state to rehabilitate the BPL residents of Akbar Nagar under the ‘Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana’ with an initial deposit of Rs. 1,000, extending the scheme to all residents seeking relocation. It set a timeline for eviction and rehabilitation, ordering the vacating of the area by March 31, 2024. [Para 20-23]

In conclusion, the court upheld the eviction, emphasizing the fundamental right to clean drinking water while providing a humane approach to eviction through a comprehensive rehabilitation plan. [Para 24-26]

Date of Decision: March 6, 2024

Raju Sahu And Others vs State Of U.P. And Others

Latest Legal News